Posted on 07/20/2023 7:16:45 AM PDT by bitt
Ukrainian forces began firing US-provided cluster bombs on Russian forces in southeastern Ukraine.
Using cluster bombs in battle is a war crime.
Joe Biden continues to destroy America’s reputation in the world.
The Washington Post reported.
Ukraine has begun firing U.S.-provided cluster munitions against Russian forces in southeastern Ukraine in a push to break up well-fortified Russian positions that have slowed Ukraine’s summer offensive, according to Ukrainian officials familiar with the matter.… pic.twitter.com/Q9oYqfQzTr
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) July 20, 2023
The Biden administration decided two weeks ago to send thousands of cluster bombs to Ukraine despite these bombs being banned in 120 countries.
A year ago then White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Russia’s alleged use of cluster bombs was a war crime.
It’s like Joe Biden and his handlers are doing their best to destroy America’s reputation in the world today and make us the bad guys.
Your analogy is pointless. The USA has not deployed any troops to Ukraine.
If Russia had not invaded Ukraine then Ukraine would not be fighting back to defend itself. How is that anybody else's fault but Russia?
Look at our economy. Look at the crime rate. Look at our schools.
None of those things are the responsibility of the federal government. The last time I looked Baltimore wasn't sending arms to Ukraine.
“We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.”
I guess it all depends upon one's point of view.
It certainly does depend on ones point of view
To quote Tom Selleck in Quigley Down Under. - “ this ain't Dodge City and you ain't Bill Hickock”
Seem to recall Winston Churchill's ‘we shall never surrender’ speech took place on June 5, 1940
Without massive support from America, Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor and Hitler's insane decision to invade Russia they would be singing the Horst Wessel song in Buckingham Palace and Winston would have been locked up in the Tower of London til the end of his days. .
On June 1940, almost all of Europe's and Russia's cites were intact and less than 100 thousand people had been killed in what became WWII.
By June of 1945, just four years later, almost all of Europe was in ruins and 85+ million people had lost their lives.
So yes, I guess it all does depend upon one's point of view.
Is that what you plan to do if you wake up and find a couple of guys in your house at 3AM?
Wouldn't it be a better plan to make them leave first?
If these illegitimate unconstitutional oath breakers had no double standards.....they’d have triple and quadruple standards.
“ We promised to protect them.”
The way WE, the States united, promise to do something for aliens is that 2/3 of our representatives in the Senate at Washington ratify a treaty.
Any other “promise” is toilet paper, and certainly not binding on our States.
Why are we not staying out of this?!
In Ukraine it doesn't matter. The Russians have placed millions of landmines, and left booby traps, and air dropped anti-personnel mines all over the place. And there are likely to be millions of other types of unexploded ordnance.
The Ukrainians face a monumental clean up job after the Russians are defeated, not to mention the need to rebuild vast numbers of destroyed houses, commercial buildings, and farms.
Even in the areas of Ukraine that Russia claims they invaded to "protect" the Russians have destroyed nearly 100% of the buildings.
Not after the Russians gave them to Ukraine.
“By June of 1945, just four years later, almost all of Europe was in ruins and 85+ million people had lost their lives.”
I have never heard a number that high for WWII.
Cuba was effectively a Russian military base for many years.
You are raising a strawman argument, since the USA does not have any military bases in Ukraine.
CBs ... shouldn’t use them against countries that have rejected them. Ditto chemical weapons, personnel mines, flame weapons, etc., etc., independent of whether we have joined into a treaty forbidding them. Even if we have entered such a treaty, we should reserve the right to retaliate in kind.
Russia, Ukraine, and the US are not signers of the voluntary ban.
Other than that I didn’t understand your post, it was contradictory.
“shouldn’t use them against countries that have rejected them.”
“Even if we have entered such a treaty, we should reserve the right to retaliate in kind.”
Just our equipment, money, troops, and spooks.
“Effectively”, means not a military base.
On the doorstep is on the doorstep.
Ukraine is not in NATO.
There are no ratified treaties for Ukraine.
You give a damn, go fight tough guy.
I care about our country and its current path to becoming North Brazil.
Your views align with Biden, Yellen, Soros, Schwab, Merkel, Fink, Rothschilds, Nuland, Vindman, etc.
How do you not question that?
I fully acknowledge that Ukraine is refusing to submit. That much is obvious.
It's also obvious that the Ukraine collapses the minute the US stops supply money and arms to keep the war going.
The US is running out of money and munitions to prop up Ukraine to the cut off date for US support is rapidly approaching. Joe Biden has publicly confirmed that we are sending cluster munitions to Ukraine because we have run out of supplies of missiles, howitzers and HIMARS so cluster bombs are all we have to send in any kind of meaningful quantities.
Shortly after this cut off occurs, the Ukraine will be completely at Putin's mercy and Putin does not strike me as a particularly merciful type of guy.
Perhaps you should quit pretending differently because such an unrealistic and emotional view of the conflict could result in the total defeat of the Ukraine
“””Why are we not staying out of this?!”””
Because NATO exists because of the Russian threat and Russia has started the biggest European War since WWII by trying to take over Ukraine to start rebuilding its empire, so NATO and dozens of other countries are lending support to the victim nation.
the dnc utopian
European state
their brave new world
will cease to exist
soon
“By June of 1945, just four years later, almost all of Europe was in ruins and 85+ million people had lost their lives.”
I have never heard a number that high for WWII.
You need to get out more.
But in the interests of avoiding any controversy that confuses the issue, let’s just set the butchers bill for WWII at a nice, round and easily documented beyond dispute 50 million killed as direct result of WWII - excluding disease, famine and people Stalin and Mao killed for political reasons
Not sure that changes my point in any meaningful fashion.
Happy now?
I just see America and NATO leading Ukraine down a path that is going to end up in disaster for the Ukraine and it's people.
The Biden and NATO dirtbags are almost certainly going to yank the rug out from under the Ukrainians and leave them high and dry and at Putin's mercy.
Your position is similar to Ike’s during the invasion of Hungary in 1956, and to LBJ’s during the invasion of Czechoslovakia of 1968. Ditto, Reagan’s response during the imposition of martial law in Poland in 1981 and G.W.H. Bush’s response to the imposition of martial law in Romania in 1989.
Tanks were always the glue that held the Warsaw Pact together.
But, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the occasion presented itself for an expansion of NATO eastward. Something like 100 million people formerly under communist rule shifted to democracy, and today enjoy rapidly increasing standards of living and quality of life, and serve as a buffer further securing peace in central Europe. The former policy of restraint showed itself to be a very wise policy.
Now, what about Finland and Sweden joining NATO, and Ukraine, and maybe also Moldova, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan wanting to join NATO?
Repeating Gov. DeSantis, we have an interest in a sustainable peace in Europe but NOT in the exact border between Ukraine and Russia and, also, Ukraine should mostly be a matter for Europe as we (the U.S.) have obligations on our southern border and in Asia-Pacific. (Former President Trump might mean this or something like it, but hasn’t been very clear.)
The problem Ukraine presents to NATO is that it is at war with Russia, and NATO isn’t about to join into a war. There needs to be peace there before we can talk about Ukraine joining NATO.
Looking back, wouldn’t accepting the post-2014 borders and securing those borders with NATO membership have been preferable to this war? That was the Trump’s position back then, but Germany said no. Germany said it would provoke Russia (as though Russia would NOT have invaded Ukraine if we left Ukraine out). Turns out Trump was right and Germany was wrong.
https://www.cato.org/commentary/making-ukraine-nato-member-all-name#
Putin interpreted appeasement as weakness. Combine appeasement by Germany with the replacement of Trump by Biden, and the invasion of Ukraine was almost inevitable.
This brings us back to needing peace or maybe a cease fire. THEN we can consider what would make that peace sustainable.
Perhaps the only viable option currently available to Ukraine at this point.
Putin may have other options, including waiting for the increasingly probable collapse of Ukraine Resistance and over running a defenseless Ukraine.
Pretty sure Putin had no desire for over running Ukraine going into this and not sure he feels it's wise thing to do even now.
But irresponsible comments like Biden's Ukraine enters NATO immediately after the war ends comments are not helpful given that Putin went to war to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO.
Especially when the Russians are well placed to defeat Ukraine absent direct US/NATO intervention with NATO forces in direct combat with Russia.
Why would Russia agree to limited peace terms after a year of heavy conflict to prevent Ukraine's membership in NATO when they are winning even after the US has transferred over 30% of pre Ukrainian War stockpiles of weapons and NATO has burned through an even greater percentage of their much smaller stockpiles of war reserves.
They are winning by not losing and why in the world would they go through all of this just to lose the objective that started the war- preventing NATO membership.
The utter lack of any diplomacy or diplomatic leadership in working towards an ceasefire is stunning and the only conclusion one can draw is that NATO wants this conflict to drag on indefinitely.
But NATO simply does not have the means to support the protracted conflict they seem to want so badly. The NATO strategy of bleeding Russia seems to be backfiring in a big way. NATO is the one bleeding to death, not Russia
The fact they we have burned through at least a third of the US war reserves intended to supply TWO simultaneous wars in less than a year to get so little results is stunning. And the US and NATO are exposed as lacking the industrial base and economic strength to replenish our stockpiles in any militarily meaningful time frame. Certainly not soon enough to impact the conflict in Ukraine. The sad fact is we are running down while Russia is mobilizing for the long haul.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.